Repeated Summation over Delta Function (examples, Section 1.

3 from
book)

ij=1 only if i=j, 0 otherwise

Sum over repeated index, so ii= 11+ 22+ 33=3
ijaj=ai (one-way is to sum over j for each value of i (read this line again!))
Alternate (smarter way): ij will be 1 (or non-zero) only if j=i. This implies that
ijaj=ai. Note that we intentionally did not write ijaj= iiai this is to avoid
confusion with repetition over i. Notice, that we are not substituting j=i in the
product-terms (they are a tensor and a vector) but taking only non-zero
terms!
ijai=aj (one-way is to sum over i for each value of j)
Alternate (smarter way): ij will be 1 (or non-zero) only if i=j. This implies that
ijai=aj. Note that we intentionally did not write ijai=jjaj this is to avoid
confusion with repetition over j. Notice, that we are not substituting i=j in the
product-terms but taking only non-zero terms!
ijajk=aik (one-way is to sum over j for each combination of i and k lengthy)
Alternate (smarter way): ij will be 1 (or non-zero) only if j=i. This implies that
ijajk=aik. Note that we intentionally did not write ijajk=iiaik for same reason
as above. There is no substitution but only taking of non-zero terms.
jkaik=aij same as above
ijaij=aii (one-way is to sum over j for each value of i)
Alternate (smarter way): ij will be 1 (or non-zero) only if j=i. This implies that
ijaij=aii.
ijij=3 (How the hell did this happen? shouldnt the answer be 9? After all
ii=3)
Ans. Please stop seeing them as two terms which are simply multiplied with
each other. Summation/expansion will give you an answer of 3.
Here is how to go about it (in a smarter way): Assume, our aim is to find ijaij
(the reason is to suppress one delta function with aim to simplify), has been
shown that ijaij=aii. Now that we have got rid of one delta function, time to
bring back the suppressed delta function a ii=ii=3.
In Problem 4-3 (discussed Aug 31 2015), the aim was to derive
kk=(3+2)ekk from
ij=ekkij + 2eij. We notice that we must get the diagonal term of stress and
strain which can be kk or ii or cc as long as k,j,c=1,2,3. It is tempting to
directly substitute i=j=k however it will create unnecessary confusion (as it
did today) with repetition (as the repetition over k is not intended).
Therefore, go with i=j=p (with i,j,p=1,2,3) to get pp=ekkpp + 2epp= ekk3 +
2epp (since pp=3). Since ekk and epp both mean the same thing ie. trace of
the strain tensor. Therefore, we can write pp=ekkpp + 2epp= ekk3 +
2epp= 3epp + 2epp=(3+2)epp. This can be rebranded as kk=(3+2)ekk.
There are existing lengthier methods which exist for this inversion, for
example this.

It is needless to say, the repeated index works only when written as product
and not as summation. In problem 4-2, the substitutions in different terms
summed over were independent. You can use a different variable if confusion
still persists.
In Problem 3-14 (discussed on Aug 31 2015), we arrived at F i=ji p,j (,j
represents partial derivative of p wrt xj). Now, one can sum over j (repeated
index) for each i to find that ji p,j= p,i. Or as a shorter argument, consider
only non-zero values of delta, implying ji p,j= p,i ii p,i (same reasoning as
above).